Boy Meets Art: BTS's "Blood Sweat & Tears" as Künstlerroman

BTS has made their glorious comeback, which means the brain powers of fans and casual followers alike are, once again, put to the test. It’s a good thing this fandom is so darn huge, because how else are we supposed to make sense of anything?

There are at least two things we know for sure: this comeback extends the theme of growth from “The Most Beautiful Moment in Life” cycle, and is centred around the idea of “boy meets evil”. The growth theme is established through the subtle motif of child’s play: Suga rides a small bicycle into the museum and smacks an unsuspecting Jimin on the head, Jimin holds a slingshot, and Jungkook hangs from a swing and eats a lollipop.

The most apparent version of this motif is Jin‘s balloon, and the scene in which he lets go of it points clearly to the idea of growing up. The other instances morph as well to indicate maturity. Jimin’s slingshot finds its grown-up counterpart in J-Hope‘s bow and arrow. Swinging creates an experience that resembles flying, and the image of Jungkook on the swing transforms into an image of flight as he floats mid-air, surrounded by feathers.

The way Jungkook leans back in both shots are evocative of Icarus’s fall, a reference which makes the metaphor of flight an ambivalent one. The myth is about the bold pursuit of ambition, but it is also about the dangers of greed, of giving in to the lures of ambition. Temptation comes in several other forms: Jimin’s apple is a Biblical reference to sin in general, while the smoke in Rap Monster‘s scenes liken the setting to an opium den, and the liquid he sips resembles absinthe, a representation of the lure of alcohol and drinking. It is interesting to note that the struggle with evil is not external, but internal, relating to one’s own inclination towards temptation.

But this still leaves a whole bunch of questions. How does this idea of boy meets evil tie in with the title of the track, “Blood Sweat & Tears”? How is the MV connected to the short films? What do we do with all the literary, philosophical, and artistic allusions—Herman Hesse’s Demian, Abraxas, the paintings, the Friedrich Nietzsche quote, the sculptures? What’s with the neon colours that contrast so jarringly with the dreamy, mock-Victorian aesthetic? And the million-dollar question: why does Jin kiss the statue?

The reading I am about to propose is that the “Blood Sweat & Tears” MV is not just about any boy meeting evil, but about a boy being exposed to the idea of evil through art, and further, facing evil as a young artist. In other words, it is not just a tale of growth, but a Künstlerroman—the coming-of-age of an artist. This is not the only way of interpreting the MV, but it is an angle that best answers the questions I have raised. It is also an approach with powerful, evocative implications for the group’s aspirations as artists.

The “Wings” short films portray a range of high and low art forms: paintings (the black bird, the forest, the mother cradling her child), dance (“Lie” and “Mama”), music (Suga’s piano-playing in “First Love”), photography (Jin’s polaroids in “Awake”), tattooing (“Reflection”), and graffiti (“Stigma”). Most of these instances also portray the members as artist figures.

Art is likewise foregrounded in the MV through the museum setting, and the use of paintings: The Fall of the Rebel Angels that captivates Jin, The Lament for Icarus in the shots of Jungkook on a swing, and Landscape with the Fall of Icarus in front of the balcony that V jumps from.

The title, “Blood Sweat & Tears”, is a more artistic take on the idea of the sacrifices BTS has had to make for their career, which they have highlighted in earlier tracks like “Dope”. The lyrics are couched in the rhetoric of complete submission to the temptations of a passionate, dangerous love affair:

Kiss me on the lips lips
A secret between just the two of us
I’m deeply addicted to the prison that is you
I can’t serve anyone else that isn’t you

This can be read as a metaphor for the boys trading in their “blood, sweat and tears” and their “body, mind, soul” for their art.

The idea that the artistic life is fraught with struggles is emphasised in the short films. There are hints of constraints that artists have to face or break away from: V is arrested for graffiti and vandalism, possibly alluding to the control of social forces over artists. Suga trespasses by smashing a glass door; the breaking of this physical structure could be read as the struggle to overcome existing artistic, social, or political trappings. The struggle to break away from constraints is reinforced by the animalistic scratches on Jin’s door. Rap Monster is kept away from means of communication by the chains around the telephone booth, perhaps gesturing towards the isolated state artists often find themselves in. J-Hope is kept locked up in a room and has to take pills, hinting at psychological issues.

Art is also often associated with violence and suffering: in “Begin”, Jungkook has a nightmare of a car crash and glass shattering over the painting of the black bird, and Suga’s piano in “First Love” goes up in flames. In “Blood Sweat & Tears”, J-Hope shoots an arrow at V that produces a colourful splatter, and coloured water bursts into the air around J-Hope. The Fall of the Rebel Angels depict a mass of creatures tangled in combat, their faces twisted in horror, while The Lament for Icarus depicts grief and death.

In short, to be an artist is to face, embrace, and grapple with the dark things in life and the evils of the world. This message is suggested by the quote above the mirror that Jin walks towards:

This is taken from German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra. The image of birthing a dancing star can be read as a metaphor for artistic creation and beauty. In the same work, Nietzsche discusses the concept of the Übermensch (overman), a person who is able to embrace both the good and the bad in life, influence the thoughts of others creatively, and who is willing to risk all for the sake of enhancement of humanity. The prominence of art and the artist figure in the MV suggests that the overman here is the artist, and the Nietzsche quote can be seen as the artist’s manifesto.

The idea that the artist’s sacrifice brings about greater good for people is reinforced by two references to the Crucifixion. The first is the statue behind J-Hope, a replica of Michelangelo’s Pietà which depicts the body of Jesus on the lap of his mother Mary after the Crucifixion. It has been secularised—in the shot in which the statue’s face explodes, we can see that the torso up of the body being carried depicts not Jesus but an anonymous figure made in a geometric sculptural style. The second reference is the scene in which Jin leads the members in a toast, which has strong echoes of the Last Supper, the final meal that Jesus shared with his disciples before the Crucifixion. These details underscore the notion of a person who sacrifices himself to save humanity.

The choice of Abraxas as a motif ties in with the figure of the overman: as an ambivalent figure who has been variously portrayed as a god and a demon, Abraxas, like the overman, unites the opposites of good and evil. The artist, likewise, has to embrace chaos in order to produce good and beauty in the form of art.

The dance incorporates gestures of the members covering their eyes, ears, and mouths, recalling the three wise monkeys that embody the proverbial principle of “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil”. Instead of trying to ignore evil, however, the boys start to open their senses to it. This is shown most distinctly in the shot of the members removing their hands that were shielding Jin’s face. Going back to the idea of the Künstlerroman, accepting the presence of evil in life is a crucial part of the formation of an artist.

Jin’s kissing of the statue, in presenting a unity between him and art, could be symbolic of the moment in which the boy who meets art becomes an artist. This may be why the MV erupts into colourful disarray after the kiss: pink and green water shoots up around J-Hope, the winged statue cracks and paint leaks out, and the dance sequence segues into negative colours of white and magenta. It is a visual representation of the embracing of the artistic endeavour and its accompanying chaos.

It should be noted, though, that the segues into a neon, pop art aesthetic begin before the kiss. An alternative reason for the contrast between this and the mock-Victorian aesthetic could be that although the MV invokes classical and Victorian art, it is still decidedly contemporary. Hence, the postmodern mixing of styles and art forms, high art and popular culture, is a reminder of its modernity.

Another interesting detail is the two statues breaking after the kiss: the winged statue cracks, and the face of the Pietà statue ruptures. I chanced upon Nietzsche’s principles of the Apollonian and the Dionysian, which may not have been something the creative team had in mind, but is nevertheless fascinating to think about. The Apollonian relates to rationality, form, and structure, and sculpture is the most Apollonian of the arts since it relies entirely on form for its effect.

Conversely, the Dionysian is that which opposes rationality and breaks down structure. Music is the most Dionysian of the arts, since it appeals directly to man’s instinctive, chaotic emotions and not to his formally reasoning mind. The coming-of-age in “Blood Sweat & Tears” is then not just one of an artist, but specifically a musician, which of course the boys of BTS are.

Embracing the darkness in life may seem to make the artist more vulnerable, but the final sequence of Jin looking in the mirror suggests otherwise. While the vase contains delicate, fragile-looking white flowers, its reflection is a bunch of Gayfeathers, also known as Blazing Star, a flower known to be tolerant of disease and inclement weather. There is a paradoxical suggestion that accepting chaos makes the artist stronger at the same time that it puts him at risk.

Like how Jimin’s face parallels the winged statue with its streaks of paint tears, Jin’s face cracks just like the statue’s. They become mid-way between human and art, symbolic of how the body of the artist is where art is created, with the tears and cracks as a reminder of the artistic struggle.

Much as I love this Künstlerroman angle, however, I can’t say that the MV is without its share of issues. There is a sense of disconnection between the narration sequence and the other sequences. Also, by pulling from so many literary, philosophical, and artistic sources, the MV toes the line between coherence and incoherence. In addition, it runs the risk of excluding those who are unable to pick out the references, and the meaning can remain inaccessible.

Still, this artistic decision is an act of trust: by weaving in a myriad of allusions, BTS and their creative team are creating a challenge that shows implicit faith that their fans and viewers can figure out what’s going on. And the magic of it is that there won’t just be one neat explanation; instead, it spawns interpretation after interpretation. Great art never lent itself to limited readings or let the person encountering it stop simply at appreciation. It draws the viewer into the creative process itself, to puzzle over it and continue to make meaning long after it has been passed on from the hands of the artist.

Note of acknowledgement: I was just about as clueless as anyone at first, but was able to develop this reading thanks to some ideas and comments I came across. I am greatly indebted to sekai-31‘s suggestion of the link between art and the Nietzsche quote, and Is-this-real‘s mention of Nietzsche’s idea of the Übermensch.

Other minor details I adapted include YouTube user Leila Soriano’s remark on the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” reference, kimnumbers’s comment on the liquid Rap Monster appears to be drinking, and Roshi’s post on the purple flower.

Yeah, I’m not a fan of the lyrics for the BDSM undertones and also what you’ve pointed out, among other reasons.

I know what you mean about the direct parallels—I didn’t like the fan theories that linked everything too directly to the story of Demian, because BTS was only borrowing ideas and devices from the story, and not doing a complete restaging of the plot.

I think there is a rich discussion to be had about BDSM and other kinks, but it’s not happening right now. Hopefully, once the quote-unquote novelty passes there can be a more mature and meaningful discussion that reaches more people.

find_nothing_here

I’m not holding my breath.

bella smith

I respect your opinion. However, while “using queer subtext for symbolizing evil”, is something you might not be fond of it doesn’t make it wrong. freedom of expression is one of the things heavily pushed in the art world. If this was how the director (we must keep in mind BTS themselves didn’t put the actual mv together they were just actors doing their duty) chose to portray boy meets evil then he has every right to do so.

just my random 2 cents. Though most people usually don’t like my responses so I’ll understand if you don’t like it either.

find_nothing_here

Well freedom of expression means I also have a right to find that portrayal shitty and harmful. I’m sorry if you don’t like that opinion, but it doesn’t make it wrong. :)

Felicity<3

I mean, you can still be killed in this day and age for being LGBT, but please keep excusing harmful narratives in the name of expression

Qing_SB

I have no regrets putting my 6 years of literary education into reviewing this MV (˘◡˘)

find_nothing_here

This just makes me remember why I stopped taking English literature classes post high school.

I find so many of the concepts expressed here a distasteful form of gatekeeping around who is an “artist” and what is “art.”

Cjontai

Is it possible to express your opinion without attacking her studies? You don’t have to agree with her opinion, but there’s no need to bash the author’s education, either.

find_nothing_here

I mean, I would want someone to be critical of my education too–I think it’s important to question what we are taught is important.

That said, I wasn’t attacking Qing’s interpretation, but rather the ideas within the interpretation itself, which would have existed in the video whether she was there to tease them out or not. If that didn’t come across, I apologize.

Cjontai

Yeah, you definitely could’ve worded that better. A critique doesn’t need to sound spiteful, and if it’s just about her interpretation, maybe considering being more specific instead of saying something that sounds like a personal jab. As for the education critique… I’ll keep your words in mind with future responses. I feel like I’ve learned quite a bit already. :)

Qing_SB

I am not sure what your lit classes were like, but my own classes actually discouraged this kind of limited view of what constitutes the artist and art.

In the context of the MV here, I don’t see this gatekeeping occurring—just because they selected classical art as the main form of art, doesn’t mean they don’t consider other forms of art as art. In fact, as one of the paragraphs mentioned, the short films do portray other forms of art like tattooing and graffiti. In addition, when I talked about what I believed great art—which I see this MV and the short films as—does, I am not expressing the view that only the works or texts that lend themselves to different readings are valuable either.

Perhaps you might have been bothered by the terms “high and low art”, so I will explain that I am using them in their purely referential capacities, not as terms laden with the value judgment that high art is the best and low art is unworthy of consideration.

find_nothing_here

That wasn’t necessarily what I was talking about. What I have more of an issue with is the philosophical ideas being drawn from–of the artist as tortured, of the artist as ascendant.

These ideas are at their heart, very limited to a specific Western romantic view. They exclude a lot of forms of work (a lot of which are feminized), and they exclude the craftworker, who doesn’t necessarily think about how deep their work is. It also diminishes the work of the artist, because that’s what a lot of art is–it’s not necessarily some deep psychological struggle but just simple hard work.

I find the ability to comprehend good and evil as the ability of a superior being both silly (because everyone struggles with moral dilemmas in their daily lives) and dangerous (because it implies a class of superior person. Notice how the Nazis really liked the idea or the ubermench) Not to mention the existence of these deep profound forms of evil and good requires a conception of the divine and diabolical which is very tied to Western Christianity.

The idea of the “coming of age” seems more like a indication of the white western preoccupation with purity and innocence than any great truth. Adulthood doesn’t require some theoretical loss of innocence on behalf of the person going through it. It’s a gradual process, not some great revelation. And it doesn’t help that these narratives almost always exclude women or reduce them to metaphors and plot devices.

I can appreciate the craft of this video–because it is it indeed crafted beautifully. But I don’t think the ideas expressed by it are necessarily profound or valuable.

Qing_SB

Thanks for explaining your thoughts, I think I can see better where you’re coming from.

I agree that the way of looking at an artist’s purpose that I have put forth is a very specific one. But I’m not sure that just because the MV suggests/ focuses on this view (or my view of its view), it discredits other qualities of artists (like hard work) and artistic beliefs. Ideas related to artistic motivation and calling are very diverse, and it could not have been possible to pull in even more of them without sacrificing coherence in a short work like a MV. I did not go into detail about the overman, and just touched on the points more relevant to the MV, so there are a lot more nuances to the concept that have been omitted. I don’t think Nietzsche was arguing that the ability to embrace both good and evil was exclusive to the overman, although he did argue that it is a key quality. That is not to say what you’ve raised isn’t valid, though—more on this later.

I realised that as I did not elaborate on my comment on putting my education into this article, it could’ve been misinterpreted. I didn’t mean I put in concepts I learned, or that I did so without reflecting on it critically, or just because I enjoyed it. Rather, I was referring to the different frameworks of thinking and the skill of drawing from texts to form a reading that I developed over the course of my studies. I’ve actually never studied Nietzsche in detail—I’m not a theory person, and my focus area veers more towards close analysis, women’s writing, and feminism (my thesis was on gender and sexuality in the short stories of an overlooked modernist woman writer).

On that note, an issue that concerns you greatly is that of gender representation. It is true that a lot of K-pop still remains non-inclusive, whether in terms of gender, sexuality, age, or cultural representation. And it is also very important when some songs and MVs do make an attempt to comment on these facets of identity, and it is my hope that we see more of such releases in future.

But here I would like to share my perspective, which you may not ultimately accept, but which I hope you will at least mull over.

It is true that the MV is taking from ideas produced by a very-dead-since-over-a-century-ago European male philosopher. It is true that his overman concept has been misappropriated to classist, racist, sexist, oppressive, horrible ends. It is also very likely that this theory to a certain measure excludes the experiences of women. And it is also true that this whole reading, the idea of embracing chaos, the artist as overman, is not very relevant to the facets of your identity, or to my lived experience as a non-artist Singaporean Chinese girl in her twenties.

But it doesn’t quite follow that because an idea or work is not valuable in terms of its relevancy to my own experience and who I am as a person, then it is not valuable or profound at all. If I were to measure the books, the songs, and other texts I come across primarily (and I say primarily, because I recognise that is not the only criterion you suggest) against whether it leaves space for who I am, then I would be missing the chance to understand other things that could be very meaningful as well, even if not as relevant. And wouldn’t that be a great pity?

I am not trying to make you accept my reading or the MV’s possible messages; I just hope you see where I am coming from, too, with respect to how a piece is approached and its value measured.

find_nothing_here

That may be true, but Neitzsche won’t miss me.

As a social science major, I did end up pouring through a lot of theory in the process of getting my degree. A lot of it was written by dead or dying (presumably) cishet white men. We had a lot of time to tease out the meanings within these works and try to apply them. (I think we even did touch on Neitzsche at one point.) So part of this is that I’m tired.

There’s a difference between me, a white women, choosing to put my energy into finding meanings within marginalized works that might necessarily not apply to my own experience, and choosing to put it into literary cannon. If I leave behind Neitzshe and Hesse, they won’t miss me. They’ll continue to be lauded and analyzed and re-analyzed considered meaningful in the halls of universities everywhere. I might want to understand them on a surface level to see how they influence people, but I’ll put my energy into picking out the meaning of works that leave more space for me, and the people who I find valuable.

Cjontai

So does no one know what a literary allegory is? How about metaphors? Reading these comments, I’m like, so y’all automatically saw Jin kiss a statue, saw V wingless and said, “Aha, homosexuality is a sin according to BTS!”? Nobody considered other interpretations whatsoever and chose to demonize this without thought beyond the surface? I thought the Nietzsche angle was fascinating, but nobody seems to want to discuss that. Or any of the other classical art angles. It’s easier to just write off both the article and an MV, that clearly involved a lot of introspective, philosophical ideas on both ends, as being casually homophobic when it’s clearly about a copious interpretation of ideas on human emotions that deserves to be explored.

First of all, who gave the statue a gender? Secondly, what role does the statue actually play here? Is it temptation? Is that temptation even evil? Is it a natural inclination for one to find fascination in temptation? Because that’s what I got. Jin is attracted to the statue/temptation. V is possibly the human form of temptation, but that doesn’t automatically denote a binary gender because he’s only the flesh form of an idea. Temptation can take on any form, so to assign it a gender, furthermore to assume that it’s male and that the kiss represented an inherent evil in homosexuality, seems a little short-sighted to me.

Food for thought: Reassign the genders of the group for this and look at your responses again. If BEG (or any girl group) had done this concept, how many of you would post the same things? If you can give creative allowance for IU and Chatshire, then this deserves it, too.

The author encourages you to read other interpretations, and I really think that’s not a terrible idea. Read her words again. She put a lot of thought into this research, so try seeing it from the angles she mentioned instead of looking at this superficially. As a writer who understands how frustrating it is to get even the most simple ideas across, I implore you to do this out of respect for art and how it plays into exploring our own humanity, especially when it comes to the idea of good versus evil.

find_nothing_here

You know, if you were going to get pissy about how the plebians don’t understand True Art, you could at least have the courage to reply to me. I have a certain about of time on my hands, and I prefer to use it in other ways than discussing the works of men who died before I was born. The philosophy of the early 20th century leaves little space for who I am as a women. And if you want to play I spy with classical art go find an art major.

I am aware of the concept of literary allegory, thank you very much. And here’s the thing: it doesn’t matter. You can talk all you want about the supposed subtext of temptation possibly being a good thing but it’s still supposition. The surface is important because that’s what people see. It isn’t going to matter to homophobes or to struggling gay kids what so-called deep meanings are hidden under that veneer. Like, V is a person, who is clearly coded male in the real world. No amount of intellectual yoga is going to get around that. The juxtaposition of queer subtext with the demonic is going to be enough. Especially when you take the lyrics into account. This contributes to the characterization of queer relationships as “physical, passionate (toxic) relationships that flame super quick” as one of my friends said.

And if you strip the veneer off, it does nothing but affirm that queer relationships aren’t really real; they just exist to make some deep point about society.

I actually watched Momo’s performance on hit the stage and my reaction was pretty much the same, but thank you for proving that you’ve run out of relevant arguments.

See, here’s the thing: nobody asked Qing to write such a deep and thorough analysis of this music video. She did it, presumably, because she enjoyed it. But we are not obligated to take that interpretation at face value, just as we are not obligated to appreciate all forms of art just because effort went into them. And hey, I did appreciate the effort of this because I bought the album, specifically because I found the confessional lyrics in their bsides really poignant.

I’m a writer too, and if my point wasn’t coming across I would automatically think I needed to fix something, instead of blaming the masses for not understanding my point. Or, I would accept that sometimes art is greater than the artist and multiple interpretations are valid. Let’s be honest though, you don’t want people to form their own interpretations, you just want them to parrot interpretations that appeal to you and your sense of intellectual superiority.

Cjontai

Exactly where in my post did I ever address anyone as “plebians”? Or call anything “true art”? I said, it’s worth considering how those works play into the theme to better understand the MV. Seems a little telling when you put words in my mouth that I never said, don’t you think? And don’t even say it was subtext.

I put up this post because I actually thought the author brought up amazing ideas, and it was frustrating that nobody wants to even give them a chance. Yes, she enjoyed it, and you’re right, nobody has to like it. But you also don’t need to act like what she wrote was pretentious babble.

I wasn’t addressing you specifically, but it’s telling that you assumed your comment was the only one worth mentioning indirectly. Are you sure I’m the one who sees others as “plebians”? Was it the Nietzsche thing? We’re not allowed to get excited about the mention of a philosopher when it rarely happens in k-pop? I made a general statement, one I’m not obligated to hold back simply because someone chooses either to 1) not read it carefully, or 2) read more into it than what’s there.

I don’t know what exactly what your issue is with those who choose to learn things beyond what they know, which is all I encouraged, like the author. Is education evil in your eyes? When people know more, does that intimidate you or something? Because then the problem isn’t those who disagree with you, or actually may want to consider alternate interpretations, including yours.

Anyway, you’ve made it very clear that you have zero respect for opposing opinions, the desire for knowledge, or any introspective thought that doesn’t apply to you personally. Pity really because you probably would gain so much more if you didn’t immediately jump into combative mode the instant you didn’t understand something. And if you really don’t have the time to waste in the comments, you’re not obligated to post or read a thing. I mean, you can mute people, Discus allows that, and I honestly don’t care if you do that. You also don’t need to keep peddling your Tumblr in the comments if you desire to be heard that badly. We allow guest posts, and the editors welcome articles on the website if it fits with current topics. Just message them at info@seoulbeats.com. Door is wide open, and for clarification, I’m not an editor, so don’t assume they would be too petty to consider your article ideas fairly. I’m actually not that petty either, but you think I am so… Well, I can’t do anything about that, now can I?

find_nothing_here

Before you ride away on that high horse, how about you take a look at your own words.

So does no one know what a literary allegory is? How about metaphors?
Reading these comments, I’m like, so y’all automatically saw Jin kiss a
statue, saw V wingless and said, “Aha, homosexuality is a sin according
to BTS!”? Nobody considered other interpretations whatsoever and chose
to demonize this without thought beyond the surface?

I’m going to need to you to tell me what exactly about this says “eager to discuss complex interpretations” and not “I’m upset that people aren’t talking about what I think is important, so they must not understand basic literary terms.”

If you’re so concerned with Nietz and Classical Art, one would think you would actually discuss your own interpretations of the MV through them in your post. Instead, you spent the main body trying to refute the idea that the juxtaposition of the queer subtext in the video is harmful, an idea that only I specifically expressed. But you weren’ttalking about me. Sure.

But you also don’t need to act like what she wrote was pretentious babble.

Hmmm…what was it you said about putting words in someone’s mouth? I thought we already discussed what I said.

Did you really expect to make that post and for me to just ignore it? I notice you didn’t have a problem with my tumblr being posted until I called your little passive aggressive bluff. It’s incredibly rich that you suggest I block you when your the one who’s obvious upset about being exposed to something you don’t agree with. You accuse me of not reading, but I actually bothered to engage your interpretations and express why I disagreed with them. None of which you do in this post.

But you know I have other things to do, like destroy learning and write an essay on how Jungkook is a smol birb that must be protected.

Cjontai

So listen. I apologize if you took personal offense by my post, but it really wasn’t aimed at you. I read all of the comments, and it felt really one-sided in general to focusing on this tiny element in the MV. I understand that part upset you personally, and I’m sorry you feel that way. It would be nice if more cultural sensitivity was applied in K-pop, but that can be said for everyone really.

I did mean what I said about submitting a post, though. We’re always open to hearing other perspectives, and if you feel this strongly about LGBT narratives being abused in this way, I think it’s a subject worth exploring. So please, don’t think I’m trying to ignore what you’re saying. I get it, but I guess I got frustrated because the comments here made it seem like the only thing important about this MV was that break in the middle. I didn’t see anyone discussing it as a whole, and I felt that was unfortunate because there’s so much here worth discussing beyond that scene.

Баянжаргал Г

Two quiestions regarding the MV:
1. What is the name of classical tune playing in the background while Jin looking at that painting?
2. What is the name of that statue Jin was kissing or it is just random statue?

Cjontai

The statue may have been custom-made for this. Not sure on the song at the beginning, sorry. Maybe try asking in some ARMY forums or fanpages? I’m sure one of them knows.

Qing_SB

The music was not long enough for me to be able to identify it through my phone app, so I’m not sure. It could’ve been recorded for the MV, because they didn’t include it in the credits below the video, unlike what they did for Jin’s short film which used a piece by Liszt.

I tried looking up the statue while writing this article, but wasn’t able to find anything conclusive, so I can’t say it is a replica or that it is an original. Sorry I couldn’t be of help.

Nation’s bitch face

This is the first bts’ song I liked not much to say about the MV itself… haven’t reached that deep I guess lol

Cjontai

You’re not alone. Everyone is confused, whether they admit it or not. I bet BTS STILL doesn’t know what’s going on because they didn’t have answers last time, either.

Nation’s bitch face

The comment section is fairly interesting too.
I don’t think there’s a need to look for only one interpretation tho or that yours being different from others makes it wrong/right.

Cjontai

True. This MV stirred up some passionate emotions! Better than leaving people lukewarm and apathetic to it.

Qing_SB

Hello, I’m really sorry for replying so late. WordPress doesn’t notify us of new comments, so it’s hard to keep track.

The pink-haired boy is Jin (which you might have figured out already, since this was three months ago :x), and the painting he is looking at is The Fall of the Rebel Angels by a Renaissance artist.

The David and Goliath thought is interesting, but since the slingshot only appears very briefly and doesn’t play a central role, I wouldn’t push this reading too far. That’s why I grouped it together more generally with the other props that pointed towards the theme of childhood and growth. But if you see the bow and arrow as a progression from the slingshot, it becomes interesting because a slingshot can only wound, but a bow and arrow kills. I think it ties in with the increasing temptation towards problematic behaviour that the MV explores.

Some of the other childhood images are tied to broader ideas as well. Jungkook’s lollipop can be linked to the other instances of eating and drinking; consuming as a motif is sometimes linked with sin and evil (e.g. the apple in the Bible, Rap Monster drinking the liquid that looks like alcohol).

You’re right about the apple coming from the tree of knowledge of good and evil; that might tie in with the reading of the artist’s role in facing difficult realities. And what you picked up on the dominance of the sight motif is related to this, too, since it’s about opening their eyes, expressed literally, to seeing and confronting these hard truths.

There’s definitely a theme of breaking free from constraints running through the MV, but I don’t know if the balloon is part of it, although it is something that floats into the sky. When I analyse something as a symbol, I look first at whether its literal characteristics match the symbolic meaning, and then at whether that symbolic meaning makes sense with relation to broader readings. The balloon is being let go of by Jin, so I wouldn’t see it as representing Jin or any person, but at most as part of him/ a person. Also, this may be a bit silly, but if you think about it, a balloon will pop at some point in the sky and its movement is controlled by the wind. So it doesn’t have control over its own movement. And this is why I wouldn’t see it as representing an artist breaking free, because an artist would have some form of agency.

Lastly, on the Icarus image– yes, that is a plausible reading. There’s definitely the implication of a darker side of “flying” and freedom, which is falling. What “falling” refers to can be read differently depending on the context, so you could see it more abstractly as a moral descent (hence the “boy meets evil/temptation” theme), or you could push it further to think about the dangers of being a well-received artist (in a contemporary, K-pop idol sense, such as being drunk on popularity and losing sight of your values and purpose). I like your idea that the breaking free can be breaking free from the corporeal world, because in some senses, that’s what the artistic endeavour does– it takes concrete experiences and turns them into something else, perhaps something more abstract (like music).

Thanks for making it through my long article and for sharing your thoughts!

Philophrosyne

Thanks for replying. :) How you analyze symbols is interesting, I can see now where I might have overreached in my interpretation.

Qing_SB

Hi Lizzie, sorry for the late reply. I think Jimin being chained to the door is part of the series of images hinting at the constraints that artists have to face. These images appear mainly in the trailers: Rap Monster is kept from the telephone booth which is chained up, J-hope is locked up in a room, V is caged, etc.

Juju

This is my first time actually involving myself in this, and I regret nothing. I enjoyed your review of BTS’ MV, but I dissent respectfully the lack of an actual critique. What you have done was thread several interpretations of the artistic caveats of the MV, but not its actual construction. In the last 2 paragraphs of your review, you mentioned the coherence and incoherence as a form of challenge to the viewers of further interpreting the layers of the MV, and thus inadvertently coining it as “great art” as it denotes the same characteristics. I understand that you did this for referential reasons, but it does dilute the philosophical complexity of the MV. This is what lead to it as being a rather biased review.

The MV had clear “artistic tropes” that only felt like afterthoughts within its defining story. There was a lack of storytelling. It weaved the innocence of Jin and the moral circumstance of Taetae through indeterminate stories of evil; majority of which were Judeo-Christian in origin. It was plainly incoherent, and this had to be pointed out. From a socio-constructivist lens, art is meant to transform its consumers by allowing them to reflect on it. The utility of using evil as what it is universally accepted as (Kantian), and using cliches to construct it, prevented this MV from being transformative. It lacked social relevance, in a sense that it protected itself from castigation.

However, what it did was show that the Korean pop industry is now willing to discuss these issues now. BTS is the kind of band that is in the brink of revolutionising not just its own industry but the Eastern standards. The mere juxtaposition of Jin’s innocence and the layers behind his last scene with the mirror made me think about how much influence a cut like that has to millions of young people. In fact, it brought me here. Truly just high praises to the team who’ve made this MV. BTS deserves their success.

Sumeyra Teke

Thank you for this well put explanation! It’s unfortunate that such innocent young adults have to go through such hardship. I blame their agencies for this. I swear those damn agencies only want to demand & receive $$ without breaking a sweat.
But then there’s also the belief that one’s who sign the contract & side with HIM are the ones who will succeed the way HE wants.